British police have launched an investigation into whether the Guardian committed “potential” terrorism offenses by publishing the incriminating NSA and GCHQ documents leaked earlier this year by Edward Snowden.

Scotland Yard assistant commissioner Cressida Dick told the MPs
Tuesday that is appears “possible that some people may have
committed offenses” in connection with the material seized
from David Miranda’s laptop earlier this year. Miranda,
journalist Glenn Greenwald’s partner, was detained for hours at
London’s Heathrow Airport and authorities confiscated his
computer, cell phone, and other devices, some of which allegedly
held material related to Snowden’s disclosures.

UK officials claim that Snowden’s trove of data included
information about British spies and that the information’s
publication puts lives in direct danger. Rusbridger said his
paper would not publish any such information and that Guardian
editors have not even looked at some of the information Snowden
provided regarding the Iraq war.

Lawmakers also threatened Rusbridger by implying Guardian staff
had violated Section 58A of the Terrorism Act, which stipulates
that it is against the law to publish or even transmit any
information regarding members of the armed forces or intelligence
employees.

“It isn’t only about what you’ve published, it’s about what
you’ve communicated,” committee member Michael Ellis said.
“That is what amounts, or can amount, to a criminal
offense.”

Ellis later asked assistant commissioner Dick if investigators
were also looking into possible infractions under Section
58A.

“Yes, we are indeed looking at that,” she said. “We
need to establish whether they have or they haven’t.”

British authorities have previously raided the Guardian’s London
office and destroyed hard drives that Rusbridger said contained
documents that had already been sent to the paper’s New York
office.

Rusbridger has consistently defended his legal and moral right to
publish the documents, saying the government activity they detail
should be left up to the public. The ongoing series of articles
has revealed that the US, UK, and a number of other countries
monitor phone, email, and social media activity of citizens not
suspected of any wrongdoing.

“We have published I think 26 documents out of the 58,000
we’ve seen, or 58,000 plus. So we have made very selective
judgments about what to print,” the editor said. “We have
published no names and we have lost control of no names.”

Critics have already compared the MPs line of questioning to the
infamous anti-communism hearings conducted by US Senator Joseph
McCarthy at the height of the Cold War. Writing in the Guardian,
Ben Emmerson, the UN special rapporteur on counter-terrorism,
said Tuesday’s hearing was disheartening for those hoping for
less surveillance in the future.

“The astonishing suggestion that this sort of journalism can
be equated with aiding and abetting terrorism needs to be
scotched decisively,” he wrote. “Attacking the Guardian is
an attempt to do the bidding of the services themselves, by
distracting attention from the real issues. It is the roles of a
free press to hold government to account, and yet there have even
been outrageous suggestions from some conservative MPs that the
Guardian should face a criminal investigation.”